All allegations of turned off smartphones being remotely turned on have been traced to phones to which the FBI had access, and upon which they inserted software to make it LOOK LIKE it was off, when it in fact was on. The same for turning on your mic and camera. Every instance traced to phones handled by police or FBI, and some malware infected phones.
There is no other cases of this in the wild. Lots of tinfoil hat types posting the same nonsense, but when you track it down it all goes to exactly ONE court transcript concerning a phone that came into FBI hands for a while, and they didn't fool anyone because they drained the battery so fast the owners knew something was wrong.
Further, if you call 911, and IF your 911 call center is so equipped, they can send a signal to turn on your GPS chipset (on some models of phones). Other phone models turn on GPS the instant you dial 911.
Not all 911 call centers have the technology to even read your phone's location. Big cities do, but it still hasn't rolled out to West Podunk yet.
One thing that is true, is dialing 911 on a GMS phone with a dead or missing SIM card WILL often get you connected to 911. Even when your carrier doesn't love you any more, your State and County government may.
All of these speed tests are ludicrously easily-gamed, and are thus of next to no value in the real world.
Looking at the code, and a log of the application I can see that it first looks up the closest server from some list, mine ended up hitting samknows1.sjo1.level3.net, port 8080, this appears to be location dependent, then it proceeds to down load (HTTPGET)a file called 100MB.bin for the download test.
It then turns around and uploads that same file (HTTPPOST) to the same address. It appears to ignore the speed of the first 2621440 bytes.
Then it starts to measure latency and packet loss against port 6000 of the same server.
So If I wanted to game that, as a carrier, the best I could do is make sure anything named 100MB.bin got a lot of priority. Since the 100MB.bin download doesn't change between consecutive fetches (tested with a browser) its quite possible you could cache both ends of this. This of course would require the carriers to rush into production some level of deep packet inspection to determine exactly what is being fetched. And if that inspection doesn't happen in the tower it would be too late to adjust the allotted bandwidth. I seriously don't think the carriers are competent enough to rush such a system into production. (Besides, they rent tower space and transmitters anyway these days, which means they don't necessarily have end to end control).
(On the other hand, I can't be sure that each requesting IP will get the exact same copy of 100MB.bin, as I could only capture if from my computer's connection.)
So I can't dismiss the results out of hand, because they do seem to measure my purchased bandwidth when on WIFI, and also my meager bandwidth when on cellular. At this time, I doubt they are being gamed, and probably do measure real world performance.
He was correctly pointing out that this test doesn't provide the government with any useful spying information.
From your mouth to god's ears.
But If there was nothing to be afraid of, do you think the FCC would have bothered to released the source code?
THEY understand that there is a lot to be afraid of, and in an attempt to build confidence and distance themselves from other branches of the government, they release the entire code-base AHEAD of time. You have to give them credit for that, and credit for understanding the level of distrust that exists between the government and the citizens.
what could the app access that you find worrying? It does grab your location, but that is trivial for any law enforcement agency these days.
And app running in your phone could grab anything it wants from the phone, and send it anywhere it wants. Its called malware, and no phone is totally immune from it, not Android, not IOS. There are ways.
This is why it matters, ESPECIALLY when the application is provided by the government.
In case you've been on vacation on Mars for the last several months, you missed the big foo-fa-rah where we all discovered that the government was in fact reading all of our email and monitoring all of our phone calls, even though we thought we had passed laws to forbid that.
Agreed, I actually PREFER to have Chrome open a pdf, because its one less virus ridden file I have to deal with. I'm still given the option of saving it if I want. Chrome itself seems to recognize which PDFs it can't handle, and prompts for download. (but those are PRECISELY the ones you have to worry about the most. )
I really don't understand why this is news, since Chrome has been doing this for years now. (At least since 2010 according to TFA).
Maybe they will enhance it enough such that we don't need to run any Adobe software. With Adobe dropping linux support all together, there are no fully capable alternatives.
He's not using any "personal assessment". Your claim is simply ludicrous. Oh and you want a link? Try this one where Verizon talks about using fiber optic solutions from FiberTower to build out their LTE network. Verizon could not run an LTE network off a T1s to their towers. You're simply an idiot.
Exactly, anyone thinking that an tower is still served by only T1 is hopelessly behind the times.
FiberTower isn't a Verizon entity, it services the entire industry.
FiberTower Corporation is a provider of facilities-based backhaul services to wireless carriers. As of December 31, 2010, the Company provided services to 6,400 billing customer locations at 3,276 billing sites in 13 markets throughout the United States; had master service agreements with nine wireless carriers in the United States; had relationships with fiber service providers giving the Company access to over 1,000 mobile switching centers (MSCs) and 125,000 fiber-based aggregation points, and owned a national spectrum portfolio of 24 gigahertz (GHz) and 39 gigahertz wide-area spectrum licenses, including over 740 megahertz in the United States metropolitan areas and, in the aggregate, approximately 1.55 billion channel pops calculated as the number of channels in a given area multiplied by the population, as measured in the census, covered by these channels.
Crown Castle. As of December 31, 2012, it owned, leased, or managed approximately 31,500 towers, and they just bought 4 billion worth of towers (9,700) from AT&T. The US has 4 or 5 if these giant tower companies, and all of them are served by much larger than T1.
They can tell you if there were times it was unplugged. They do this as a "service" so your teenagers don't unplug it. (Your dealer/service man routinely plugs into this same socket for service).
What data is available on each model of car is well known (by them, the manufacturers, the dealerships, service shops, and car enthusiasts. Any box you put between it would probably have to be fairly intelligent to limit speed, and braking (but not drop it).
It would seem that Speedtest already has app for most major mobile players. What is so what is different about that one, beside the fact that all the result is centralized by the FCC (with the associated risks) ?
Speeddtest.net uses the data for their own purposes. Using them enriches them.
Supposedly this is strictly for the FCC, by the FCC.
Won't be useful, unless you want to do nothing but download the same chunk of data over and over again.
We can only hope that the authors were wise enough to request randomly named data blocks from randomly selected data servers, because otherwise we will be measuring the effectiveness of the carriers cache at the nearest tower base.
It measures upload and download speed and packet loss and latency. The target server from which upload and download are measured is not clear. Carriers prefer you only measure against a server on their own network, and will blame the upstream for any measurements to other locations.
I have this installed, and it keeps separate track of BOTH wifi measurements and cellular network measurements. But it measures both, and allows you to swipe left and right to see each measurement it took.
What I've learned: My carrier is pretty pathetic.
Note Being Open source, you can see exactly what is being reported, but I predict that won't stop the tinfoil hat crowd from claiming the binary does not reflect the source code.
I would have modified your first line to have a period after:
The progressive model doesn't have GPS. Theoretically,
With many modern cars having built in GPS, that data is (or can be) available on the CAN Bus, which is what Progressive plugs tap into.
Further, OnStar equipped cars were already collecting that information and saving it for sale to insurance companies. When this became known, the backlash caused them to roll back this decision, but their initial announcement of this is still available on the web, but no longer on GM's site.
I suggest you visit YouTube and watch a few (entertaining and instructive) hours of Russian DashCam videos.
Things I've learned, (not all of which are unique to Russian drivers)
1) they have no concept of defensive driving. 2) they have no concept of being in the proper lane, and will turn across any number of lanes of traffic 3) they pass on the right with reckless (reckfull) abandon, and at high speed 4) they will jump into the oncoming lane to pass cars slowing to make a turn, without even considering a left turn 5) they follow too close 6) they have utter disregard for traffic signs and signals (Russian standards for visibility of same are abysmal) 7) traffic circles are a fender bender magnet 8) yielding to oncoming traffic at intersections is a rule honored mostly in the breech 9) controlled (signalized) left turn intersections simply do not exist in Russia. 10) driving to the right of big trucks is way more dangerous than most people realize
Objective evidence in the US has been built up over decades upon decades of accident reports by police that are for the most part un-bribe-able, and all of these eventually get fed into computer systems. (Much of which is publicly accessible), and into insurance company actuarial databases.
In Russia, police are perhaps not so un-corruptible, and the insurance companies strongly encourage the use of DashCams, and so they are building up mountains of Objective evidence in visual form.
Still, you ask for the impossible, when you ask for percentages. because there is no way to determine the universe, when only Accidents are reported, not uneventful trips.
Those actions that cause a lot of serious accidents based on decades of traffic statistics are slowly outlawed in the traffic regulations. Insurance companies have broad input to these regulations. They would like to see accidents and deaths diminished. This is one place where corporate greed works to everyone's advantage.
Its an imperfect science, but its the only science we have.
Chances are if they "merge" into the space occupied by your vehicle, Slamming on the brakes is as likely to cause an accident much more severe than the one you hoped to avoid; an accident that is likely to involve SEVERAL cars.
If you weren't following so close to the car ahead of you, there would be room for the impatient idiot to merge, but your insistence that nobody gets ahead of you increases your risk.
Leave an idiot gap. Its that simple. Even if 100 cars take advantage of the gap, you will still arrive at your destination.
Personally I wouldn't mind it as currently implemented (my insurance company doesn't offer it so I haven't done it) because they don't monitor you 24/7. With Progressive, they send you a device in the mail and you keep it in your car for a few weeks to pick up actual driving metrics, and then send it back.
If it could make my insurance cheaper, then perfect (though that is kind of hard - my car insurance is about $40 a month) I just won't visit the meth lab or the bath house during that time.
Few weeks? Are you sure? How about when it starts being 24/7/365, send it in when your payment is due.
Is the data subpoena-able? Will I get a ticket by mail for 5 over the speed limit, with no court appeal because my device already testified against me? Is it location coded?
Today, they claim they only measure a few things according to the Progressive FAQ
What driving habits impact my potential savings? How often you make hard brakes, how many miles you drive each day and how often you drive between midnight and 4 a.m. can all impact your potential savings. What other information do you collect? Once you plug in the Snapshot device, we'll collect your Vehicle Identification Number and take note of whether the device stays plugged in, so we can alert you if it gets disconnected. The Snapshot device doesn't track your location or whether you're speeding, and it doesn't contain GPS technology.
But there is no way to monitor that, and with modern cars putting ever more data on the CAN bus, an open and extensible standard used in cars, almost all of that information is already on the bus. Especially speed.
If you buy into this, does your insurance company next insist on you wearing a body monitoring device?
Risk Pools have a purpose. A pool of one is not a pool.
. (these are not flat links, but uniquely encoded for clicks) and Google does not give things away as a rule.
gain, with the alligations of high crimes based on mere speculation.
Most are indeed flat links. Follow one of them. They lead directly to the page of the same name at the seller' web site, or to the sellers internal search facility via isbn numbers.
Merely mentioning that you can buy the book if you go to another site is not advertising. Even if there was an agreement for Barnes And Nobel to pay google 12 cents for a hit to their site, it still wouldn't be advertising, because the B&N link looks no different than any other link, and the sale proceeds if one of these sites actually makes a sale go to the Publisher, the Author, and to the book seller, not google.
The Judge has ruled. He said it is fully with fair use. Your arguments mean nothing, because someone with a higher pay grade has ruled.
And google gives a way far more than any company I know.
By forming new ones, I presume you mean taking a collection of some random radio emissions scattered around the universe and arbitrarily deciding they are a "structure"?
The irony is they (Sears) shut down their Catalog support after the internet started to really take off. They were in a position to be what Amazon is now, back when Amazon was just books, and already had the infrastructure to support it... Even if they just put their catalog online in 1997 (with telephone ordering/payments), they'd still be very relevant today. "We tried that with Prodigy, the Internet is just a fad."
Yup. They were both too early and too late to the same party.
If their service reliability and scalability is well above industry averages and they have excellent backbone connectivity to their suburban mall parking lots, I'd be all over it in a heartbeat. But that's a long shot.
Why would that be a long shot?
This type of equipment, racks and blades and switches, is dirt-f'ing cheap right now. Malls already have big pipes, and if they aren't big enough getting bigger pipes isn't that hard.
Most of these sears stores weren't in the Malls anyway, they were in the somewhat smaller strip malls. If they do it on a grand enough scale, it would make a good server farm, close to their commercial customers.
I do worry about the name though... Ubiquity Critical Environments, = UCE (unsolicited commercial email). Dammit! Et tu, Sears?
Lyrics are a separately copyrighted work. The copyright holder is in most cases not the person who even wrote, sang, or recorded the song.
Again you don't even understand what we are talking about here.
Click this link to show a typical google books text search so you can at least be vaguely acquainted with the topic under discussion http://tinyurl.com/p4xq4w9
Oh, my gawd, you don't even have a clue about what is being discussed!!! Not the first clue!!!
We are not talking about a list of books for sale, with publicly released dust jacket descriptions. we are talking about the FULL TEXT search capability of entire books.
Key this into google, Quotes and all: "to moscow with an atlas" Click the first hit, or any hit that points to Books.google.com.
You will see the text of the book, Not all of the book. Just snippets. Not a price in site. There are links to libraries and book sellers.
No wonder you are so confused. You don't even know what this issue is about.
They will own it in public statements, (or at least they will own part of it), and they will tell you to get over it. They will then go on to even bigger excesses and violations. They will attempt to have laws passed making encryption a crime (again).
Slashdot Mirror
Mostly a collection of myths and half truths.
All allegations of turned off smartphones being remotely turned on have been traced to phones to which the FBI had access, and upon which they inserted software to make it LOOK LIKE it was off, when it in fact was on. The same for turning on your mic and camera. Every instance traced to phones handled by police or FBI, and some malware infected phones.
There is no other cases of this in the wild. Lots of tinfoil hat types posting the same nonsense, but when you track it down it all goes to exactly ONE court transcript concerning a phone that came into FBI hands for a while, and they didn't fool anyone because they drained the battery so fast the owners knew something was wrong.
Further, if you call 911, and IF your 911 call center is so equipped, they can send a signal to turn on your GPS chipset (on some models of phones).
Other phone models turn on GPS the instant you dial 911.
Not all 911 call centers have the technology to even read your phone's location. Big cities do, but it still hasn't rolled out to West Podunk yet.
One thing that is true, is dialing 911 on a GMS phone with a dead or missing SIM card WILL often get you connected to 911. Even when your carrier doesn't love you any more, your State and County government may.
All of these speed tests are ludicrously easily-gamed, and are thus of next to no value in the real world.
Looking at the code, and a log of the application I can see that it first looks up the closest server from some list, mine ended up hitting samknows1.sjo1.level3.net, port 8080, this appears to be location dependent, then it proceeds to down load (HTTPGET)a file called 100MB.bin for the download test.
It then turns around and uploads that same file (HTTPPOST) to the same address. It appears to ignore the speed of the first 2621440 bytes.
Then it starts to measure latency and packet loss against port 6000 of the same server.
So If I wanted to game that, as a carrier, the best I could do is make sure anything named 100MB.bin got a lot of priority.
Since the 100MB.bin download doesn't change between consecutive fetches (tested with a browser) its quite possible you could cache both ends of this.
This of course would require the carriers to rush into production some level of deep packet inspection to determine exactly what is being fetched. And if that inspection doesn't happen in the tower it would be too late to adjust the allotted bandwidth. I seriously don't think the carriers are competent enough to rush such a system into production. (Besides, they rent tower space and transmitters anyway these days, which means they don't necessarily have end to end control).
(On the other hand, I can't be sure that each requesting IP will get the exact same copy of 100MB.bin, as I could only capture if from my computer's connection.)
So I can't dismiss the results out of hand, because they do seem to measure my purchased bandwidth when on WIFI, and also my meager bandwidth when on cellular. At this time, I doubt they are being gamed, and probably do measure real world performance.
He was correctly pointing out that this test doesn't provide the government with any useful spying information.
From your mouth to god's ears.
But If there was nothing to be afraid of, do you think the FCC would have bothered to released the source code?
THEY understand that there is a lot to be afraid of, and in an attempt to build confidence and distance themselves
from other branches of the government, they release the entire code-base AHEAD of time. You have to give them
credit for that, and credit for understanding the level of distrust that exists between the government and the citizens.
what could the app access that you find worrying? It does grab your location, but that is trivial for any law enforcement agency these days.
And app running in your phone could grab anything it wants from the phone, and send it anywhere it wants.
Its called malware, and no phone is totally immune from it, not Android, not IOS. There are ways.
This is why it matters, ESPECIALLY when the application is provided by the government.
In case you've been on vacation on Mars for the last several months, you missed the big
foo-fa-rah where we all discovered that the government was in fact reading all of our email
and monitoring all of our phone calls, even though we thought we had passed laws to forbid that.
Once bitten twice shy.
Agreed, I actually PREFER to have Chrome open a pdf, because its one less virus ridden file I have to deal with.
I'm still given the option of saving it if I want. Chrome itself seems to recognize which PDFs it can't handle, and prompts for download.
(but those are PRECISELY the ones you have to worry about the most. )
I really don't understand why this is news, since Chrome has been doing this for years now.
(At least since 2010 according to TFA).
Maybe they will enhance it enough such that we don't need to run any Adobe software. With Adobe dropping linux support
all together, there are no fully capable alternatives.
He's not using any "personal assessment". Your claim is simply ludicrous. Oh and you want a link? Try this one where Verizon talks about using fiber optic solutions from FiberTower to build out their LTE network. Verizon could not run an LTE network off a T1s to their towers. You're simply an idiot.
Exactly, anyone thinking that an tower is still served by only T1 is hopelessly behind the times.
FiberTower isn't a Verizon entity, it services the entire industry.
FiberTower Corporation is a provider of facilities-based backhaul services to wireless carriers. As of December 31, 2010, the Company provided services to 6,400 billing customer locations at 3,276 billing sites in 13 markets throughout the United States; had master service agreements with nine wireless carriers in the United States; had relationships with fiber service providers giving the Company access to over 1,000 mobile switching centers (MSCs) and 125,000 fiber-based aggregation points, and owned a national spectrum portfolio of 24 gigahertz (GHz) and 39 gigahertz wide-area spectrum licenses, including over 740 megahertz in the United States metropolitan areas and, in the aggregate, approximately 1.55 billion channel pops calculated as the number of channels in a given area multiplied by the population, as measured in the census, covered by these channels.
Crown Castle. As of December 31, 2012, it owned, leased, or managed approximately 31,500 towers, and they just bought 4 billion worth of towers (9,700) from AT&T. The US has 4 or 5 if these giant tower companies, and all of them are served by much larger than T1.
They can tell you if there were times it was unplugged. They do this as a "service" so your teenagers don't unplug it.
(Your dealer/service man routinely plugs into this same socket for service).
What data is available on each model of car is well known (by them, the manufacturers, the dealerships, service shops, and car
enthusiasts. Any box you put between it would probably have to be fairly intelligent to limit speed, and braking (but not drop it).
It would seem that Speedtest already has app for most major mobile players. What is so what is different about that one, beside the fact that all the result is centralized by the FCC (with the associated risks) ?
Speeddtest.net uses the data for their own purposes. Using them enriches them.
Supposedly this is strictly for the FCC, by the FCC.
You mean cache everything they fetch on every tower?
Won't be useful, unless you want to do nothing but download the same chunk of data over and over again.
We can only hope that the authors were wise enough to request randomly named data blocks from randomly selected data servers, because otherwise we will be measuring the effectiveness of the carriers cache at the nearest tower base.
There appears to be no magic new technology here.
It measures upload and download speed and packet loss and latency.
The target server from which upload and download are measured is not clear.
Carriers prefer you only measure against a server on their own network, and will blame the upstream for any measurements to other locations.
I have this installed, and it keeps separate track of BOTH wifi measurements and cellular network measurements.
But it measures both, and allows you to swipe left and right to see each measurement it took.
What I've learned: My carrier is pretty pathetic.
Note
Being Open source, you can see exactly what is being reported, but I predict that won't stop the tinfoil hat crowd from claiming the binary does not reflect the source code.
I would have modified your first line to have a period after:
The progressive model doesn't have GPS. Theoretically,
With many modern cars having built in GPS, that data is (or can be) available on the CAN Bus, which is what Progressive plugs tap into.
Further, OnStar equipped cars were already collecting that information and saving it for sale to insurance companies. When this became known, the backlash caused them to roll back this decision, but their initial announcement of this is still available on the web, but no longer on GM's site.
I suggest you visit YouTube and watch a few (entertaining and instructive) hours of Russian DashCam videos.
Things I've learned, (not all of which are unique to Russian drivers)
1) they have no concept of defensive driving.
2) they have no concept of being in the proper lane, and will turn across any number of lanes of traffic
3) they pass on the right with reckless (reckfull) abandon, and at high speed
4) they will jump into the oncoming lane to pass cars slowing to make a turn, without even considering a left turn
5) they follow too close
6) they have utter disregard for traffic signs and signals (Russian standards for visibility of same are abysmal)
7) traffic circles are a fender bender magnet
8) yielding to oncoming traffic at intersections is a rule honored mostly in the breech
9) controlled (signalized) left turn intersections simply do not exist in Russia.
10) driving to the right of big trucks is way more dangerous than most people realize
Objective evidence in the US has been built up over decades upon decades of accident reports by police that are for the most part un-bribe-able, and all of these eventually get fed into computer systems. (Much of which is publicly accessible), and into insurance company actuarial databases.
In Russia, police are perhaps not so un-corruptible, and the insurance companies strongly encourage the use of DashCams, and so they are building up mountains of Objective evidence in visual form.
Still, you ask for the impossible, when you ask for percentages. because there is no way to determine the universe, when only Accidents are reported, not uneventful trips.
Those actions that cause a lot of serious accidents based on decades of traffic statistics are slowly outlawed in the traffic regulations. Insurance companies have broad input to these regulations. They would like to see accidents and deaths diminished. This is one place where corporate greed works to everyone's advantage.
Its an imperfect science, but its the only science we have.
Chances are if they "merge" into the space occupied by your vehicle, Slamming on the brakes is as likely to cause an accident much more severe than the one you hoped to avoid; an accident that is likely to involve SEVERAL cars.
If you weren't following so close to the car ahead of you, there would be room for the impatient idiot to merge, but your insistence that nobody gets ahead of you increases your risk.
Leave an idiot gap. Its that simple. Even if 100 cars take advantage of the gap, you will still arrive at your destination.
Personally I wouldn't mind it as currently implemented (my insurance company doesn't offer it so I haven't done it) because they don't monitor you 24/7. With Progressive, they send you a device in the mail and you keep it in your car for a few weeks to pick up actual driving metrics, and then send it back.
If it could make my insurance cheaper, then perfect (though that is kind of hard - my car insurance is about $40 a month) I just won't visit the meth lab or the bath house during that time.
Few weeks?
Are you sure? How about when it starts being 24/7/365, send it in when your payment is due.
Is the data subpoena-able?
Will I get a ticket by mail for 5 over the speed limit, with no court appeal because my device already testified against me?
Is it location coded?
Today, they claim they only measure a few things according to the Progressive FAQ
What driving habits impact my potential savings?
How often you make hard brakes, how many miles you drive each day and how often you drive between midnight and 4 a.m. can all impact your potential savings.
What other information do you collect?
Once you plug in the Snapshot device, we'll collect your Vehicle Identification Number and take note of whether the device stays plugged in, so we can alert you if it gets disconnected. The Snapshot device doesn't track your location or whether you're speeding, and it doesn't contain GPS technology.
But there is no way to monitor that, and with modern cars putting ever more data on the CAN bus, an open and extensible standard used in cars, almost all of that information is already on the bus. Especially speed.
If you buy into this, does your insurance company next insist on you wearing a body monitoring device?
Risk Pools have a purpose. A pool of one is not a pool.
Camel's Nose under the Tent.
. (these are not flat links, but uniquely encoded for clicks) and Google does not give things away as a rule.
gain, with the alligations of high crimes based on mere speculation.
Most are indeed flat links. Follow one of them. They lead directly to the page of the same name at the seller' web site, or to the sellers internal search facility via isbn numbers.
Merely mentioning that you can buy the book if you go to another site is not advertising.
Even if there was an agreement for Barnes And Nobel to pay google 12 cents for a hit to their site, it still wouldn't be advertising, because the B&N link looks no different than any other link, and the sale proceeds if one of these sites actually makes a sale go to the Publisher, the Author, and to the book seller, not google.
The Judge has ruled. He said it is fully with fair use. Your arguments mean nothing, because someone with a higher pay grade has ruled.
And google gives a way far more than any company I know.
By forming new ones, I presume you mean taking a collection of some random radio emissions scattered around the universe and arbitrarily deciding they are a "structure"?
The irony is they (Sears) shut down their Catalog support after the internet started to really take off. They were in a position to be what Amazon is now, back when Amazon was just books, and already had the infrastructure to support it... Even if they just put their catalog online in 1997 (with telephone ordering/payments), they'd still be very relevant today. "We tried that with Prodigy, the Internet is just a fad."
Yup. They were both too early and too late to the same party.
No vision except hindsight.
Where ever your mom dragged you.
If their service reliability and scalability is well above industry averages and they have excellent backbone connectivity to their suburban mall parking lots, I'd be all over it in a heartbeat. But that's a long shot.
Why would that be a long shot?
This type of equipment, racks and blades and switches, is dirt-f'ing cheap right now. Malls already have big pipes, and if they aren't big enough getting bigger pipes isn't that hard.
Most of these sears stores weren't in the Malls anyway, they were in the somewhat smaller strip malls.
If they do it on a grand enough scale, it would make a good server farm, close to their commercial customers.
I do worry about the name though... Ubiquity Critical Environments, = UCE (unsolicited commercial email).
Dammit! Et tu, Sears?
Lyrics are a separately copyrighted work.
The copyright holder is in most cases not the person who even wrote, sang, or recorded the song.
Again you don't even understand what we are talking about here.
Click this link to show a typical google books text search so you can at least be vaguely acquainted with the topic under discussion http://tinyurl.com/p4xq4w9
Oh, my gawd, you don't even have a clue about what is being discussed!!!
Not the first clue!!!
We are not talking about a list of books for sale, with publicly released dust jacket descriptions.
we are talking about the FULL TEXT search capability of entire books.
Key this into google, Quotes and all: "to moscow with an atlas"
Click the first hit, or any hit that points to Books.google.com.
You will see the text of the book, Not all of the book. Just snippets.
Not a price in site. There are links to libraries and book sellers.
No wonder you are so confused. You don't even know what this issue is about.
Exactly.
I've been posting this prediction all along.
They will own it in public statements, (or at least they will own part of it), and they will tell you to get over it. They will then go on to even bigger excesses and violations. They will attempt to have laws passed making encryption a crime (again).
You haven't seen anything yet.
I did state that Google makes ad revenue on the pages that serve the snippets.
Again, go back and read what the judge wrote. Your first reading was a failure.
There is no advertising on the snippet pages.
Further, the lyrics group published the FULL lyrics, not snippets, so NO not the same thing at all.